Beyond our limits

Let us say that the world is a “shoe box.” There is “John” all by himself in it.
What would be “moral or immoral” for John? What would be “right or wrong” for John?
Answer: What he believes to be.

Let us say that there is another person who joins John later on.
What would be “moral or immoral” to do? What would be “right or wrong” to do?
Answer: it depends on their belief.

Besides beliefs, there are matter of fact consequences. John may enjoy the company of that other being for he was alone before, but at the same time, John likes to have his own space all for himself.

If john was a “black or white” type of individual; he will either choose to be alone or to have company. There is no awareness of integrating both experiences without choosing.

The paradoxical and beautiful thing about the world is that every moral value, every belief system that someone may cherish as “truth” is contradicted by another living species in Nature.
Do you think that a caste system, a hierarchy based on being born in certain social class is “bad”?
Take a look at bees and ants.
Do you think that family life is a thing of the past?
Take a look at how wolves live.
Do you think that to be a loner and to mingle with the opposite gender just to procreate is to take advantage of someone?
Take a look at the life of tigers.

If we observe life as it is in Nature and not the artificially created “world at the office,” we will discover those beautiful contradictions, which make this world what is.

What could be God’s law then, in the observation that every species of “his” creation acts contradicting any written law that could ever be?

Perhaps there is a law for every species?
Perhaps.
I have not seen any written codes of conduct for Tigers yet. But because there is that diversity around, could I make myself such a narrow minded, judgmental person who takes sides to label something as “good or bad”?

If there was a law of “good and bad” coming from God himself wouldn’t that be a contradiction of what already exists?
That is why many individuals have decided to create their “own world” in their own “shoe box” to fit their beliefs as “righteous” in their world.

As John’s “shoe box” becomes populated, there is obviously a problem of “logistics” in the human world that animals are unaware of.
Thinking, logic, analysis creates that contradiction which a human being will pretend to resolve through moral standards.

An animal adapts and harmoniously is able to live in balance with its surroundings.
A thinking, “rational” human being is unable to adapt like that.

The question is not “why is that?” because that will take our logic and rationality into greater contradictions.

The point is to observe, feel and act.

Nature has a completely different way of manifesting beyond logic, rationality and belief systems… well beyond our “office world” morality.

The “world of the office,” John’s “shoe box” has rationality, analysis, judgment, comparisons, separation, and, ifs, or, not … computer operations, that we have learned to troubleshoot by breaking the problems in “halfs” until we discover the “culprit.”

Nature does not work like that.

Which world do we choose?
Wrong question if we could see beyond duality, but a rational “good” question for those who cannot.

At that point, we could understand practically that “God” could never have given us any laws to be followed, but to allow us to make sense of things for ourselves…Not intellectually, but by using our “instincts.”
That is insight, intuition, love for the Totality, appreciation of what is, gratefulness and a sense of balance.
When we discover in ourselves what is beautiful, then we have discovered what we have in common with “his” creation.